[clisp-list] ASDF 2.29 released

Dear CLISP developers,
could you update CLISP to use ASDF 2.29?
CLISP currently sports an antique ASDF 2.011, when
even SLIME only supports but 2.014.6 and earlier
(which was used by Quicklisp when initially released almost two years ago).
Since then, ASDF has evolved a whole lot.
ASDF 2.27 was a major rewrite of ASDF, and everything since then
should be considered as candidate releases for ASDF 3:
http://lists.common-lisp.net/pipermail/asdf-announce/2013-February/000014.html
ASDF 2.28 was released shortly after 2.27, without an announcement,
to fix an issue found by Stelian Ionescu using TEST-OP on some systems.
ASDF 2.29 is a stability release, with which I'm once again
inviting implementers to update the ASDF they distribute.
Since ASDF 2.27, ASDF 2.29 further brings:
* deferred-warnings support for Allegro, CMUCL, SCL;
fixes to the CCL support.
* Upgrade fixes regarding fallback system versions;
making it possible (via massive use of eval-when)
to compile ASDF without loading it first.
* Compatibility with private use of :D package nickname
by not claiming it for package ASDF/DRIVER anymore.
Also explicitly handle NIL in safe-file-write-date,
in case the implementation doesn't issue a file-error in that case;
make UTF-8 the default encoding for with-input-file.
Be portable to #+(and sbcl (not sb-eval)).
* Bugfixes to old bugs: inline-methods can now be unqualified (lp#485393),
defsystem-depends-on accepts arbitrary specs, not just names (lp#1027521).
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
The main reason to always choose the simplest explanation is that it leaves
least leeway for parasites to manipulate you. If you don't pick the simplest
explanation, you're being manipulated. — Faré

Thread view

Dear CLISP developers,
could you update CLISP to use ASDF 2.29?
CLISP currently sports an antique ASDF 2.011, when
even SLIME only supports but 2.014.6 and earlier
(which was used by Quicklisp when initially released almost two years ago).
Since then, ASDF has evolved a whole lot.
ASDF 2.27 was a major rewrite of ASDF, and everything since then
should be considered as candidate releases for ASDF 3:
http://lists.common-lisp.net/pipermail/asdf-announce/2013-February/000014.html
ASDF 2.28 was released shortly after 2.27, without an announcement,
to fix an issue found by Stelian Ionescu using TEST-OP on some systems.
ASDF 2.29 is a stability release, with which I'm once again
inviting implementers to update the ASDF they distribute.
Since ASDF 2.27, ASDF 2.29 further brings:
* deferred-warnings support for Allegro, CMUCL, SCL;
fixes to the CCL support.
* Upgrade fixes regarding fallback system versions;
making it possible (via massive use of eval-when)
to compile ASDF without loading it first.
* Compatibility with private use of :D package nickname
by not claiming it for package ASDF/DRIVER anymore.
Also explicitly handle NIL in safe-file-write-date,
in case the implementation doesn't issue a file-error in that case;
make UTF-8 the default encoding for with-input-file.
Be portable to #+(and sbcl (not sb-eval)).
* Bugfixes to old bugs: inline-methods can now be unqualified (lp#485393),
defsystem-depends-on accepts arbitrary specs, not just names (lp#1027521).
—♯ƒ • François-René ÐVB Rideau •Reflection&Cybernethics• http://fare.tunes.org
The main reason to always choose the simplest explanation is that it leaves
least leeway for parasites to manipulate you. If you don't pick the simplest
explanation, you're being manipulated. — Faré